In the light of the documentary/article/revelations about [INSERT NAME OF LATEST PREDATORY MAN], I have made note of a few phrases that I’d love to never hear again in the context of rape and sexual assault.
“Shocked and appalled”
"We should teach consent classes!"
"I dated him/married him/met him once in a Costco and he didn’t rape ME!"
I honestly don't understand this. How can simply informing jurors of their rights according to the law, which the judge should presumably do anyway, constitute an offence of any sort, never mind contempt of court? And why is the decision about whether to prosecute made by a Tory MP rather than the Crown Prosecution Service?
I don't know why but I really like this automated account @BAILII
It spits out links to judgements of UK court cases (usually High Court or Court of Appeal) taken from BAILI.
I don't work in the legal profession or anything related to it. I don't understand a lot of legal terminology and certainly don't have access to the reams of case law that the judgements reference.
But within my limited understanding I find even things like this fascinating (it's a very very localised dispute over a small plot of land).
